Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Jonathan D. Safren" <yonsaf AT beitberl.ac.il>]

There are two other venues for scholarly discussion of the historical
problems raised by the Bible, but each one has a catch:
Miqra - deals with any and all aspects of Biblical research. The
contributors are all professionals, and the level of discussion is high.
    The catch: You have to be a member of the SBL to join, which effectively
bars membership to non-professionals (unless they subscribe to JBL). As a
result:
    This list is not very active, but it's very useful when it is.
Ancient Near East Discussion List - deals with Ancient Israel and all the
other cultures of the ANE.Membership is open to anyone, rewgardless of
professional qualifications or the lack of them.
   The catch(es): If you can't cut it, you will soon be found out. Not that
you will be desubscribed, but you simply won't be able to contribute much
without the proper academic background. Also, the moderator puts on the lid
when there are too many postings on the historicity of the Bible.
   But this is where it's at. I have colleagues who won't join B-Hebrew, but
contribute regularly to ANE, and to a lesser degree to Miqra.
Sincerely,
Jonathan D. Safren
Dept. of Biblical Studies
Beit Berl College

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Zellmer [mailto:zellmer AT digitelone.com]
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2000 11:48 AM
To: Biblical Hebrew
Subject: Re: Purpose for discussion


Actually, Professor, I believe there was more than one question here.
Let me start with the Hebrew knowledge question.  The list description
states:  "Knowledge of Hebrew is assumed, but belittling someone for
their lack of skill or ridiculing someone for making a mistake--even a
basic one--is unacceptable."  Actually, there are very few that come out
and say they do not know Hebrew.  There are many who admit that they are
weak in Hebrew knowledge, and quite a few of those have indicated that
they have joined the list to work on remedying that situation.

The list, as you know, having been on it for several years, is open
because of the history of both it and the B-Greek list.  It is
specifically designed to encourage study of the Hebrew Bible by all,
amateur and professional.  And, while members are expected to support
arguments with evidence, there is no assumption that one needs to be a
scholar, or that the evidence need be drawn directly from primary
sources.

As for the seeming interest in the historical questions, what I have
observed during the past several months is very little true examination
of the questions.  What *has* occurred is that one side would make state
a position or two and another side would pooh-pooh it, and the posts
would fly between a half dozen people for a week or more without the
addition of any new material.  And almost all the material that has been
put forward are old arguments that have been hashed and rehashed for
year and decades.  There has been no real movement to resolution of the
questions because the tools just don't exist among all the participants.
And, as I pointed out in my original post, this forum is not designed to
have the scholars which are necessary to resolve such questions.

Now, for your "starter" question: Why did I address Ian and you?  (You
apparently ignored the et al., which could [and actually did] include
the person that you wanted me to ask.)  Actually, I addressed Ian
specifically because he is normally the one who first brings up these
subjects.  The person ..., oh, let's stop beating around the bush!
Everybody knows you were referring to Peter!  So...  Peter reacts to the
stimulus like he does in several areas of study on this list.  And it is
apparent from his continuing the threads that he feels (probably
justifiably) that his viewpoint is not really being considered by Ian or
you or others that line up on that side of the question.  So I didn't
specifically ask Peter what his point was for continuing the discussion;
I think I've got that one figured out.  You, Ian, and others, on the
other hand, continue to ask for evidence that Peter just doesn't seem to
have a complete handle on.  Nor should he, as he is a linguist and
translator as opposed to a historian.  Nor should the vast majority of
us on this list.  So I ask you, because I really can't figure out your
purposes:  What do you hope to accomplish with these extended
discussions?  If it's scholarly debate of the historical questions, I'm
not sure we amateurs can give that to you.  If it's to hear the
emotionally loaded counter-positions of people who base a lot of their
arguments on faith that God actually can and does intervene in the lives
of people, then I question both the discussions' value and their
appropriateness for this forum.  Such a purpose would be much less than
respectful, which as you know, is a basic guideline for us here.

Therefore I will not redirect my question.  I really would like to know.

Yours,

Paul